CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 13 octobre 2016

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sA6BC7FA7 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:right } .s9793A85B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s8229ABDD { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s68C46B95 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s3F59B822 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-transform:uppercase }   Communicated on 13 October 2016   FIFTH SECTION Application no 14652/16 Dan Mikael HERNEHULT against Norway lodged on 10 March 2016 STATEMENT OF FACTS The applicant is a Swedish national. In 2013, the applicant´s sons A, B and C were taken into public care. In 2015 the High Court partly upheld the decision by confirming the placement of B and C in public care. The High Court´s judgment was upheld by a final Supreme Court decision in 2015. Complaints The applicant complains under Article 8 of the Convention that his right to respect for his family life has been infringed through the domestic authorities’ decision to take B and C into public care and not to terminate the public care of B and C. The applicant further relies on Articles 8, 6, 10 and 13 of the Convention and complains that the domestic procedures were lengthy and unfair. QUESTION Has there been a violation of the applicant’s right to respect for his family life, contrary to Article 8 of the Convention, through the authorities’ decision not to terminate the public care of B and C?